Amendment No. 46 has been ruled out of order as it involves a potential charge upon the revenue.
Amendment No. 47 was discussed with amendment No. 23.
SECTION 13.
I move amendment No. 47:
In page 12, before section 13, to insert a new section as follows:
"(1) For the purpose of preventing the misuse of drugs, the Minister shall, as soon as may be after the passing of this Act, make provisions for the introduction of standard prescription forms which shall be used by every registered medical practitioner, registered dentist, registered veterinary surgeon and every person employed or engaged in dispensing medicines at any hospital or health clinic.
(2) Standard prescription forms shall be in such form as the Minister shall prescribe by regulations.
(3) Regulations shall also be made requiring that every prescription form be stamped with a prescribed stamp."
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
I move amendment No. 48:
In page 12, subsection (1), line 39, to delete " qualified person " and substitute " person who is either a practitioner or a pharmacist ".
This amendment is consequential on amendment No. 16.
Amendment agreed to.
Question proposed: " That section 13 as amended stand part of the Bill."
On the section I would like to ask the Minister if he could give due consideration to the possibility of formulating a national drug formulary. This is a very, very important section from the pharmaceutical point of view. With modern chemistry and pharmacy it is very, very simple to move a small group of elements from one end of the formula to another and thereby change the terminology and name of a compound. It is interesting to note that in the schedule of drugs in the eight last drugs—4 Cyano—1—methyl—4—phenylpiperidine—was not included originally because it has not been componded. Though it and associated drugs can have the same effect as many of the drugs which are named at the beginning of the Schedule like the amphetamine-type drugs they can be much more sophisticated in their action than the type of drug we want to see controlled.
I mentioned on the first or second day on which the Committee sat that this is one of the problems which would face all Ministers attempting to impose regulations and efficient legislation for the control of same. It is not before its time that a national drug formulary was established. I should like to see this included under section 13. I know the Minister is aware of the dangers, complications and indeed in many cases the impossibility of keeping track with the modern-day chemists and pharmaceutical firms. I am not casting any aspersions on them. They produce a more sophisticated and a safer type of compound. He has, under his other qualifications Ministerial problems to solve, and any other substance he has included is covered very well. I do not know how the Minister could get around it, but I would like him to consider including in the Bill some type of national drug formulary as a basis for the future.
I think the Deputy's main point is the inclusion of a national drug formulary in the Bill.
Never changing.
This is the misuse of drugs and the control of them. I do not think the idea of the drug formulary would be appropriate to this Bill. It is possible that it might be desirable to have it in future in other medical legislation.
As far as the other aspect is concerned, that is the formula——
I think we have left that.
Could I make a point in clarification? This point arises on another amendment.
I want to ask the Minister one final question. If a company in Ireland markets a drug which is not included in the Schedule, must they notify the Minister? As I understand it, the national drug formulary for controlled drugs is contained in the Schedule to this Bill.
The National Drugs Advisory Board suffices for all.
There is no national drug formulary. Is the Minister satisfied that if a new compound comes on the market they do not have to come to the National Drugs Advisory Committee?
The Minister makes the decision. It comes to the Minister first. He refers the case to the National Drugs Advisory Board for their advice.
The Deputy is quite satisfied that if a new compound comes on the market or if one of these compounds contained in the Bill is changed——
I must verify the situation.
The Minister must give the decision.
Can I take it that the Minister will give consideration to this formulation of the National Drugs Board under some other legislation?
Consideration of the formation of a National Drugs Board?
Yes.
It is not relevant to this Bill.
The Minister has to authorise the marketing of a drug.
After it has been graded by the National Drugs Board. If it was a drug which should be controlled it would be included in the Schedule by Government direction.
The Minister has to give the final decision?
Yes.
The National Drugs Advisory Board advises the Minister but he must give the decision. Therefore the Minister is notified of any new drugs.
Before we leave that point, I think it was in the national papers that the pharmaceutical or manufacturing chemists suggested that they were not covered in this Bill. Has the Minister had any communication on that matter?
I got a communication last week but I have not had the time to look at it yet. There are some representations from them. I have not read them yet so I do not know the content.
I wondered if they would be covered by this section.
I certainly think the Minister must be given the opportunity of considering that representation.
I accept that.
I had it from one of the Deputy's colleagues.
Question put and agreed to.